Navy Says All UFO Videos Classified, Releasing Them Will Harm National Security | Hacker News Reader

Navy Says All UFO Videos Classified, Releasing Them Will Harm National Security

vice.com

47 pointselsewhen19 comments

There's probably a risk that some "UFO" videos are top secret plane or missile tests that they don't want revealed.

And as a psychological trick, it's probably easier to keep the conspiratorial minded crowd focused on chasing aliens rather than looking at the military's actual acts in war.

It's really enough to be unable to identify the objects. A video which shows exactly what the object looks like to your sensors, with an admission that you are unable to identify it, is the best feedback its operator could wish for. Even if the existence of such an operator is hypothetical (maybe there is an unknown but natural explanation) why risk it?

Well the last ones revealed that they are completely incompetent in identifying flying objects, like the one that was clearly a bird. From that perspective it makes sense to not release any more UFO videos.

This whole thing is embarrassing to everyone involved.

But birds are flying objects. Well, sometimes.

> “While three UAP videos were released in the past, the facts specific to those three videos are unique in that those videos were initially released via unofficial channels before official release,”

As a fan of M*A*S*H and its usage of satire to depict the military, this line has me in stitches. It's sounds so much like something Henry Blake or even Colonel Flagg would say.

If the Navy can't identify your craft, then it'll give you an idea of their capabilities/camera qualities?

All of the hyped UFO videos released over the past few years are easily explainable given a basic understanding of geometry, imaging and gimbals.

Mick West has some great videos on it: https://youtu.be/Q7jcBGLIpus

  All of the hyped UFO videos
  All

You should read and watch this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27349789

The original post was: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27348698

I'm not going to pretend I understand much of the math/physics involved here, but that comment about the object moving at 46,000mph has me very intrigued.

That speed makes me less interested. It's more obviously a mistake of some kind.

Mick West... after a bit of rummaging around in the cobweb infested corners of my brain I remember Cowboy Programming: https://cowboyprogramming.com/

I truly don't understand why everybody keeps referencing Mick West's debunking video of these pieces of UFO footage. He gives the distinct impression of being a smugly dogmatic "skeptic" who approaches this subject with all the answers set in his mind beforehand and then molds any arguments or evidence to fit what he's already convinced of, He does this as rigidly as a deep UFO nut would automatically assume something unusual in the sky is always aliens. Note that this behavior is emphatically not genuine skepticism, it's all the opposite in many ways and no more reasoned or rational than a blind belief in the paranormal.

I actually corresponded on the guy about inconsistencies in his own claims about the navy UFO videos and he gave no satisfactory justification for his extremely superficial arguments, which essentially focus on his own perceptions of inconsistencies in the footage itself and simply disregard weeks of repeated sightings, radar tracking and up-close eye-witness encounters between trained, professional pilots and the objects themselves in the air.

These are pilots who on at least a couple of these occasions observed the objects from fairly close range, in broad daylight and had their observations at least partially confirmed at the same time by also professional operators of sophisticated tracking systems (radar etc) onboard the Navy's ships.

Mick West mostly disregards all of this

Debunking with a critical eye is good and necessary but again, one sometimes one gets the feeling that certain debunkers feel a need to do so at all costs because that's their label, even if their own "rational" interpretations make leaps of logic much worse than simply admitting that something inexplicable was observed.

All of the UFO videos are easily explained as fake or just plain garbage that could be anything.

The military uses UFO stories as cover for research (such as experimental aircraft) they want to keep quiet. This is well known for many decades.

It's a little strange how many people still fall for it and how it's taken on a life of its own regardless of what they do now.

But not that strange I guess because people seem drawn to nonsense and will believe anything.

This is fully consistent with the compelling theory advanced by an HNer a few years back that the sudden proliferation of UFO sightings a few years back was a de-stigmatization campaign:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21859896

Real "ufos" are not from another planet. They are also not of human design. They come from outside the consensus material universe.

Does the navy definition imply not of human design? Or just unknown earthly origin

Unidentified Flying Object. The definition is any object that is observed in the sky without being properly identified/classified for whatever reason.

"Th-They come from another d*burp*imension, Morty! I got drunk one time and won a fight with the leader of the Floozaflarps from C-196... and now they're coming back to get their revenge. I wasn't expecting them to develop dimensional travel technology for another 20 years or so. G-Get in the car, Morty! We have to go NOW!"

Reply on news.ycombinator.com